From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=93scar_Fuentes?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [SPAM UNSURE] Maybe we're taking a wrong approach towards tree-sitter Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2021 14:52:01 +0200 Message-ID: <87bl6kezgu.fsf@telefonica.net> References: <8735rzyzbz.fsf@163.com> <86v94v3xh9.fsf@stephe-leake.org> <87wnpargnb.fsf@elite.giraud> <87h7gey7zx.fsf@163.com> <83pmv2twrl.fsf@gnu.org> <86sfzwogsn.fsf@stephe-leake.org> <87o8akmy4p.fsf@163.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="17397"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:TpZp3XtMl6oaSRLyihyQ/F7cc1s= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Jul 30 14:52:54 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1m9S0T-0004IT-QX for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 30 Jul 2021 14:52:53 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:59952 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m9S0S-0008RR-Mx for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 30 Jul 2021 08:52:52 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:45720) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m9Rzo-0007i2-4o for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 30 Jul 2021 08:52:12 -0400 Original-Received: from ciao.gmane.io ([116.202.254.214]:36170) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m9Rzm-0001x8-Fe for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 30 Jul 2021 08:52:11 -0400 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.io with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1m9Rzj-00039L-7a for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 30 Jul 2021 14:52:07 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Received-SPF: pass client-ip=116.202.254.214; envelope-from=ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; helo=ciao.gmane.io X-Spam_score_int: -16 X-Spam_score: -1.7 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.7 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.248, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:271841 Archived-At: Arthur Miller writes: > I undestand that having specialized regex matcher is more efficient than > some generalized regular matcher current font-locking in Emacs relies > upon, but is it *that* more efficient to be worth the extra troubles? AFAIU this is not about efficience, but mainly about correctness (modern languages are increasingly more difficult to analyze) and also about decreasing the maintenance load. In the process, Emacs gets support for some new languages too.